Each row is one party. The bar shows how its MPs voted relative to a neutral midpoint — to the right = on-side with the majority position, to the left = opposed. The percentage figure is the share of that party’s MPs who took the same side: higher = more whip-disciplined, closer to 50% = a freer vote.
| Party | Stance vs neutral midpoint | Net % | Discipline | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Labour Party | Lab | +39 | 89% on-whip · 315 MPs | |
| Conservative and Unionist Party | Con | -39 | 11% on-whip · 109 MPs | |
| Liberal Democrats | LD | -36 | 14% on-whip · 67 MPs | |
| Labour and Co-operative Party | Lab | +38 | 88% on-whip · 35 MPs | |
| Independent | Ind | -12 | 38% on-whip · 8 MPs | |
| Scottish National Party | SNP | -14 | 36% on-whip · 7 MPs | |
| Reform UK | Ref | -41 | 9% on-whip · 5 MPs | |
| Democratic Unionist Party | DUP | -43 | 7% on-whip · 5 MPs |
Source · Hansard · alignment is the share of party MPs who voted with the party majority on tagged divisions
| Date | Motion | Aye | No | Carried |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 27 Apr 2026 | Pension Schemes Bill: Motion relating to Lords Reason 88Q Aye: Support giving the government a time-limited reserve power to set minimum private-market asset allocation targets for pension schemes, arguing this will channel pension savings into productive UK investment without overriding savers' interests · No: Oppose mandating pension scheme investment allocations, arguing it risks poor returns for pensioners, amounts to government picking winners, and that the pension industry itself opposes compulsion — preferring facilitation over diktat | 280 | 165 | Yes |
| 15 Apr 2026 | Pension Schemes Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 35 Aye: Support the government's position by rejecting the Lords amendment, backing the Pension Schemes Bill as the government intends — including consolidation of pension schemes, mandatory scale requirements, and reserve powers to direct pension investment into private assets · No: Support the Lords amendment, opposing the government's approach — arguing that mandatory consolidation and state direction of pension investment are heavy-handed, that smaller well-run schemes should be exempt from scale requirements, and that the government is overreaching into people's private savings | 277 | 161 | Yes |
| 15 Apr 2026 | Pension Schemes Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 1 Aye: Support the government retaining powers to direct pension schemes toward specific investments (such as UK infrastructure or growth assets), rejecting the Lords' attempt to strip those powers from the Bill. · No: Back the Lords amendment: investment decisions should rest with trustees acting in savers' best interests, not with ministers, and the government should not hold reserve powers to steer pension funds toward particular assets or sectors. | 280 | 159 | Yes |
| 15 Apr 2026 | Pensions Scheme Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 5 Aye: Support the government's decision to reject the Lords' amendment and restore the original bill text on this pension-related provision · No: Support retaining the Lords' amendment and accepting the change the upper chamber made to the Pensions Scheme Bill | 271 | 104 | Yes |
| 15 Apr 2026 | Pension Schemes Bill: motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 77 Aye: Support rejecting the Lords amendment, accepting the government's position that a statutory review of public sector pension sustainability is unnecessary · No: Oppose rejecting the Lords amendment, backing the call for a transparent review of the long-term costs and intergenerational fairness of public sector pensions | 272 | 96 | Yes |
All 9 divisions on this issue →
By party, the MPs whose voting record on pensions and retirement is most closely tracking the party majority. A fuller “most active by speech volume + written questions” ranking is pending — needs per-issue speech aggregation.
LabLabour Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Diana Johnson | Kingston upon Hull North and Cottingham | 100% |
| Debbie Abrahams | Oldham East and Saddleworth | 100% |
| Mark Ferguson | Gateshead Central and Whickham | 100% |
ConConservative and Unionist Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Mark Francois | Rayleigh and Wickford | 20% |
| Jesse Norman | Hereford and South Herefordshire | 20% |
| Steve Barclay | North East Cambridgeshire | 17% |
LDLiberal Democrats
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Layla Moran | Oxford West and Abingdon | 29% |
| Max Wilkinson | Cheltenham | 20% |
| Luke Taylor | Sutton and Cheam | 20% |
LabLabour and Co-operative Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Anna Turley | Redcar | 100% |
| Sarah Hall | Warrington South | 100% |
| Stella Creasy | Walthamstow | 89% |
IndIndependent
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Dan Norris | North East Somerset and Hanham | 89% |
| Rosie Duffield | Canterbury | 50% |
| Shockat Adam | Leicester South | 38% |
SNPScottish National Party
| MP | Constituency | % on-whip |
|---|---|---|
| Stephen Gethins | Arbroath and Broughty Ferry | 43% |
| Brendan O'Hara | Argyll, Bute and South Lochaber | 33% |
| Stephen Flynn | Aberdeen South | 33% |
Mapping each Westminster issue to the equivalent council service bucket (so “Pensions and Retirement” → the matching service line on council finance, with the ranked-spend table this section wants) is its own taxonomy job. Council service spend lives on the council pages today; cross-cut by issue here in a follow-on pass.
The primary material behind this topic, assembled for anyone writing about it: House of Commons Library briefings (Open Parliament Licence), the divisions tagged to it, and recent committee evidence. Every item links to its source. Want it worked into a question you actually have? Commission a research briefing.
Loading sources…
What the parliamentary record shows on this topic, in date order — each vote, Library briefing and evidence session, linked to the primary item. A record of what happened, not a commentary on it.
Loading the record…